Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Long Island man arrested for firing rifle near gang of men on his lawn

What in the world is going on in New York?

"A "mild mannered" Long Island man accused of firing a rifle in the air during a confrontation with a large group of men on his lawn was charged with felony assault Monday. This according to the New York Daily News.

"George Grier, 31, fired the shots - without injuring anyone - on Sunday night after arguing with the men, police said.

Police in LA and NYC routinely are obsessed with protestors with rocks and signs, and disarming citizens that threaten the establishment (IMHO). At the same time, gangs roam free terrorizing citizens.  Photo: Ralsten Getty (NYDN).

"Grier, who is black, was arguing the group of Hispanic men at his Uniondale home. His family told the Associated Press he was trying to protect them."

Right...and they left out the part about the fact that witesses said that there was a gang of at least 30 youths in Grier's front yard between his door and his car, and that Grier thought they could be MS-13, that this group is known for carrying machetes, and that Grier asked the group to leave several times before they dared him to shoot the gun, called him a coward and then told him his wife and kids were as good as dead. At that point, after telling his wife to call police, Grier fired 3 warning shots into his lawn.

Police used a special satellite imaging to show (infared) where the shots came from. They arrested Grier, who told police the group was trespassing, was threatening him, and moving towards him from several sides, and that he feared for his safety. They also allegedly called him a racial slur several times, which appears to be OK since they are Hispanics, and it appears only whites get in trouble for such comments. The gun was lawfully owned.

Instead of arresting the trespassing thugs for criminal trespass and gang related activity, police arrested Grier for reckless endangerment (in his own front yard) and seized his rifle. The gang now knows that Grier and his family have no lawfully owned gun.

Way to go, morons. You have just disarmed a man you KNOW is being threatened with death by a criminal gang, perhaps MS-13. He now has no way to defend his family, especially if he ends up behind bars. He now cannot purchase a firearm in NYC until this is resolved, and will need to get arms via other means if he wants to protect his family and himself.

After all, we know the police have no duty to protect individual citizens, but they sure as hell can disarm them in liberal NY and make them sitting ducks.

However, MS-13 or whatever gangs are roaming that area can sleep easier tonight.

This is exhibit A on why I am glad I live in Florida, why liberal gun enforcement laws do nothing to protect law abiding citizens and how Police either get in the way or make things worse in NY, California and places like Maryland and Mass:

Read more:

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Hibel, Terry and Why Arizona's law was drafted to spark outrage

Why is Arizona's law drafted to single out a selected group for attention (reasonable suspicion stops and asking for papers upon cause)? Why indeed, since under past Supreme Court precedent, a state can require anyone (not as specific group, but all within its borders) to produce papers to the Police. Given the settled state of Terry stops and reasonable suspicion, is the debate on Arizona's law a distraction?

Since an illegal detention would be considered a form of false imprisonment, and many states still allow citizens to resist unlawful arrests by police as they would otherwise resist a tort, I suppose that what is going on in Arizona with their new law, and the opposition thereto, is relevent. But, police have long needed only reasonable suspicion to detain and frisk, and states can require all within their borders to submit papers to the police or risk arrest.

State and local police have had the authority to stop and frisk based solely on reasonable suspicion since the case of Terry v. Ohio, the breakdown of which is: .


Fast forward a couple of decades and the Supreme Court upheld a Nevada law that required anyone who was stopped by a police officer to produce an ID, state license, military ID, state ID, or green card or immigration papers. That case was Hibel v. The Sixth Judicial District of Nevada. Click here for an editorial review of the case before the final decision.

By the way, the federal government, working with local authorities, has been held to a reasonable suspicion standard and may question workers and ask for papers if they have a reasonable suspicion that the worker is not in the U.S. legally ( see: INS v. Delgado).
You can look up Terry and Hibel on It seems to me that the Arizona law would be 100 percent lawful under Hibel and Terry had the drafters of the law merely incorporated the right to ask for ID or citizenship status against all people, and not just a certain group.

Instead, the Arizona law seems drafted to ignite debate and fracture between left and right. The Hibel case held Nevada can require anyone pulled over by police turn over some form of lawful ID or risk arrest. Clearly, that includes undocumented workers.

Surprise. Arizona seeks to single a group out while the media fails to inform the rest of the country that if you live in a state like Nevada, you will be busted wether or not you committed a crime if you fail to turn over ID.

And, nothing here that I have written discounts the gravity of the situation at the Mexican border, especially in Arizona. It is grave, dangerous and escalating. Something needs to be done. But state legislatures know the implications of the Hibel and Terry holdings. Why not draft a law accordingly, that dragnets everyone?

After all, the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures was never intended to be remedied with the issuance of a judicially sanctioned warrant. The prohibition was against general warrants and writs of assistance of all kinds, even the kinds courts issue. The warrant clause was orginally intended to help comply with the unreasonableness prohibition by requiring all warrants for search or seizure contain particularity and specificity. These days, wholesale seizure and itemization of business records and dragnet searches of houses and places and persons, have rendered the Fourth Amendment as meaningless (all in,  "the war" on whatever). All a judge need do is sign the warrant and the scope of the seizure need only be limited by practical reasons and the totality of the circumstances. It is common knowledge among constitutional attorneys that the Fourth Amendment is on life support.

The difference is, big business has no use for everyone, and much use for undocumented workers, so they are financially backing the media campaign to challenge Arizona's law. Yet, the irony is, all the liberals that are ranting and raving fail to realize that they are MUCH MORE HOPELESSLY UNDER THE POLICE BOOT than the undocumented workers in Arizona. Simply read the Hibel case. The state can do whatever it wants as long as it acts as a police state against everyone, instead of a targeted group.

Wake up! The Arizona law seems drafted to not survive a challenge by targeting one group. Had they really wanted to enforce such laws, why not use a Hibel type law which is draconian against everyone?

To me, the sooner we can put the Arizona case into it's proper context, the better.
As you can see, there has been a police exception to probable cause for decades now, and now a state can enact a law requiring anyone pulled over by police to produce papers. Sorry. We live in a Police State whether we want to admit it or not.

Where Arizona's law differs is it appears to single out a group of people. Why? So it would ignite debate and arguments amongst US citizens who are probably already required to produce papers upon a Terry stop to Police, depending on where you live. That is why they are laughing at us accross the pond...

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Back from Move and Vacation

I have been away for over 3 months.

I relocated to the Southwest area of Florida.

It has been business as usual as far as the news behind the news and the agenda.

The Gulf Oil Disaster is something I have updated on my website about. A complete disaster. BP and the government have both completely dropped the ball.

Now they say it is capped. But, is it?  The Gulf coast is in danger of losing everything.

This article from USA Today in June pretty much outlines many of the worse case scenarios.

Now they are talking mass scale evacuations, methane danger that could spread accross the nation. Meanwhile, the cleanup will take years. The Obama administration considers suing the state of Arizona over its immigration law to be priority one, it appears.

Bizarro world. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Corruption and greed continue to steer this country. I will post more very soon. I promise.

Thursday, March 25, 2010


Government and Media Target So-Called Truther Movement as Acts of "Terror" Conveniently Increase.

As the MSM reports about the health care plan and its passage, we are now being told about various threats and even acts against Congress. One Represenative even discovered a casket on his front lawn. Congress has asked the FBI to investigate, and, by the way, almost one-quarter of conservatives allegedly believe Obama is the Anti-Christ.

The right, and especially the so-called truth movement, is being targeted (and possibly set-up). It's not like there has been nothing on the terror threat horizon close to home:

First, we had the underwear bomber over the Christmas holiday.  Nevermind the plane would have survived such a pathetic attempt to blow it up, immediatly following this incident the media took up the hue and cry for naked scanners at airports.  Problem, reaction, solution. The Hegelian Dialetic.

Then, we were told that Joseph Stack, a so-called anti-government "truther" flew his Piper Cherokee small aircraft into the building containing the Internal Revenue Service in Austin, Texas. There was fire, damage and two deaths, while several other employees had to be evacuated.

Then, we were told Stack left a suicide note, and was involved in a decade long fight with the IRS over his small business.   The contents of what was supposed to be Stack's "diatribe" was even posted online, but someone removed any trace of his website hours afterward.

Then, CNN reported  that Stack, who flew an airplane into a building housing an Internal Revenue Service office, may have replaced some of its seats with a drum of fuel to cause maximum damage, a law enforcement official familiar with the investigation said last month. Never mind this is sheer conjecture, it conjures up images of the 9-11 terrorists flying jumbo jets laden with fuel into the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon.  After the attack, Stack's daughter said she "agreed" with her father about the government, and referred to him as a hero, but later was forced to retract that statement, and called the victim of the incident a hero.

AP Photo. Austin Plane Crash into IRA Building

Of course, when anyone dug just a bit beneath the surface it turns out that Stack had ties with the U.S. government as an independent contractor and designed a remote control system for small airplanes before his untimely demise. Raising the obvious question, who or what was really in that plane, and what flew it into the building?

Last November, the media reported about the so-called jihandist Major Hasan, who went ballistic and shot up a Texas Army base, killing numerous unarmed soldiers. I wrote an article  stating that the events were not adding up and it went viral in a matter of hours. A few months before that an allegedly racist elderly white "truther", who had issues with the government, carried a rifle through the entrance of the Holacaust Museum in Washington, D.C., killing one of the guards before being brought down by gunfire himself.

The "truther" and "birther" movement is being set up for something big. And, the tea party movement has already been hijacked by Republicans, Beck  and Sarah Palin. Stay tuned.

Friday, February 12, 2010



Sarah Palin recently was hired to speak at the national Tea Party convention in Nashville, Tennessee. And speak she did, crib notes on her left hand and all. Palin certainly cuts a nice figure in a tight dress suit and stilletto heels, but the rhetoric became more mainstream Republican talking points combined with catchy phrases and digs at President Obama, as the night went on.

Let's face it, Palin has morphed from a so-called middle class maverick and Governer of Alaska, to a creation of Fox News and highly paid conservative consultants. And it is this attempt to have Palin come off as both anti-establishment and a maverick of the average John or Jane Doe that makes Palin appear flippant and cartoonish at times. Compare that Palin to the Palin that appeared on Youtube shortly after she was elected Govorner talking about how she was there to do the people's work and fight corruption and how "cool" she thought Congressman Ron Paul was for challenging the status quo. Too bad Palin seems entrenced with that same status quo.

Speaking of Congressman Ron Paul, the Tea Party Movement actually grew out of his efforts and objections during the Paulson-Bush government bailout hearings, and his even older cries about ending or auditing the Federal Reserve Board. Somehow, Paul is nowhere to be found now, at least at these Tea Party gatherings, and the movement has been effectively co opted by Glenn Beck, Fox News, and turned into an anti tax, anti Obama movement.  Several founders of the original movement have already quit in disgust over the Republican party takeover of what started as an independent, libertarian type of organization and movement.

A recent New York Daily News poll showed that more than half of the nation have an unfavorable view of Palin, and a full seventy-one percent think she is not Presidential material.

Mike Lupica, from the New York Daily News, has certainly noticed.  Lupica called her a political lightweight, mocked the crib notes of simple phrases that Palin had written on her palm, and referred to Palin as "the pinup-girl of the tea party movement"; "a hotter, less read,  Margeret Thatcher", "the piano that thinks it wrote the concerto."

Additionally, Lupica (better known as a sports journalist) called Palin's statement that she would not dismiss questions of whether she would run for President of the United States as an example of Palin's delusions of grandeur.

Palin the palm reader: Tough concepts such as Energy, Tax Cuts and Lifting America's Spirits. AP Photo

Wednesday, February 3, 2010


"The matermind (of the 1993 WTC bombing) is the government of the United States. It was a phony, government-engineered conspiracy to begin with...It would have never amounted to anything had the government not planned it." - Defense Attorney Ron Kuby (protege of W. Kuntsler, commenting on the evidence).

"The FBI Allowed the WTC Bombings to Happen", NY Times. p A-1 by Ralph Bloomingthal. 28 October 1993. Under NYT headline of "Tapes reveal unsucessful attempt to thwart bombings".

"Evidence has emerged showing...the FBI may have known about the bombings in advance, and might, might have been able to prevent it." Dan Rather, CBS Evening News. October 23, 1993 (5:44.20 PM video transcript. Click hyperlinked quotes for videotaped evidence of this broadcast).


AP Photo. Mastermind of 9-11?

As the citations and quotes above the header imply, there was much more to the first World Trade Center bombing and resulting trial than many Americans may remember. 

A majority of New Yorkers, now including the Mayor of NYC and New York policians, are not thrilled the Obama adminitration (by way of Attorney General Holder) has set a civilian court trial for the so-called self professed mastermind of 9-11 Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-conspirators in Manhatten. Citing issues of national security, costs, and safety logistics, many conservatives and New York liberals are screaming foul and demanding the trial be moved.  One can hardly fault New Yorkers for feeling this way, but many conservatives and neo-cons (and pro war liberals like Joe Lieberman) are demanding that not only should the trial be moved, but that it belongs before a miltary tribunal. They fear a civilian trial may turn into a "fiasco". Now, it remains unknown whether or not Khalid will receive a civilian trial or not. He has already allegedly confessed after hours of the Bush-Cheney approved method of waterboarding (183 times).

There is currently a back and forth going on through the MSM on whether or not the terror trials should be held in NY or in civilian courts at all (citing threats of a fiasco and possible terror threats).

What do they mean by this? Who cares? The only fiasco these self proclaimed patriots likely fear is the same type of embarassment and ridicule that resulted from the 1993 terror trials from the first WTC bombings and the alleged mastermind(s) of that attempt to knock one tower into another and kill 200,000 New Yorkers.

Emad A. Salem was an FBI informant, who was a key witness in the trial of Ramzi Youssef, Abdul Hakim Murad, and Wali Khan Amin Shah, convicted in the World Trade Center Bombing of February 26, 1993. Youssef, the self styled mastermind of the bombings, warned that eventually the buildings would come down. Youssef has been linked to Project or Operation Bojiinka (big bang) by authorities, through data found on his computer when apprehended by authrities in Manila. Those who have studied 9-11 know the connection.

All hell broke lose when FBI informant Salem, sensing a double-cross by his handlers, secretly recorded conversations between himself and his agency handlers which revealed not only did the FBI supply the materials to build the bomb, they had Salem switch materials to assure the bomb would go off. Salem revealed these tapes to defense attorneys when they deposed him. The government fought their admission claiming national security exemptions, which the federal court granted for the most part. Nevertheless, Salem testified under oath concering the tapes, and defense attorneys eventually released parts of the tapes and transcripts to the media. The evidence given to the media, or discovered through investigative journalism, leads to the disturbing revelation that federal law enforcement knew, supplied  and encouraged terrorists in the role of a sort of agent provacatuer.

The role of the FBI and how they either allowed or encouraged the first WTC attacks is set forth in stark detail by award winning intelligence author and investigative jounalist James Bovard in his article, "The FBI Blunders and the First World Trade Center Bombing" . 10 November 2004. FF Foundaton.

Former Watergate associate prosecutor Richard Ben-Veniste warned that the (Emad Saleem, FBI imformant) tapes pose "an absolute nightmare for federal prosecutors."  And indeed, he was correct. But the American people have a short attention span. Suggest that the feds might have known about and prevented the World Trade Center bombings, and you will be labled a conspiracy theorist and a kook.

Many readers will see this and objectively consider it, and they will be deeply disturbed--perhaps sick to their stomach. Many more will refuse to accept any of this as fact because to do so will totally destroy their world view, and they will be angry that this evidence was dredged up again. Go back to sleep, but do not say you were never warned. The world is not as we are led to believe it is.

But the next time you hear someone on Fox News or an ex official from the Bush administration rail against the idea of the alleged confessed mastermind of 9-11 receiving a civilian trial (say, didn't Bin Laden confess already?), now you know what the real fear may be: history repeating itself. And when you consider the vigor that Holder and Obama are pushing this idea through despite huge outcries to the contrary, the notion of political payback does not seem out of the relm, either. In any event, this all needed to be put into context.

See: Who Bombed the WTC.  Also: wtc-93,  Youtube: WTC 1993 was FBI inside job. Also: Youtube: Another rare capture of the 1993 CBS News broadcast with Dan Rather.